Cited by 202Information Retrieval and Search BehaviorUsability and User Interface DesignRecommender Systems and Techniques

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

How users assess Web pages for information seeking

Open access
Tombros, Anastasios, Ruthven, Ian, Jose, Joemon M.·2005·Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology

Abstract

In this article, we investigate the criteria used by online searchers when assessing the relevance of Web pages for information‐seeking tasks. Twenty‐four participants were given three tasks each, and they indicated the features of Web pages that they used when deciding about the usefulness of the pages in relation to the tasks. These tasks were presented within the context of a simulated work‐task situation. We investigated the relative utility of features identified by participants (Web page content, structure, and quality) and how the importance of these features is affected by the type of information‐seeking task performed and the stage of the search. The results of this study provide a set of criteria used by searchers to decide about the utility of Web pages for different types of tasks. Such criteria can have implications for the design of systems that use or recommend Web pages.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/asi.20106

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 41 references

1 of the 41 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Cool C., 1993, Proceedings of the 14th National Online Meeting, 77

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–201 of 201

  • Untitled work

    (2010) · International journal of communication · Cited by 301

Metadata

Authors
Tombros, A., Ruthven, I., & Jose, J. M.
Affiliations
  • Queen Mary University of London (GB)
  • University of Strathclyde (GB)
  • University of Glasgow (GB)
Corresponding author
  • Tombros, Anastasios
  • Ruthven, Ian
  • Jose, Joemon M.
Venue
Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2004-12-15
Volume
56
Issue
4
Pages
327-344
ISSN
  • 1532-2882 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-2890
OpenAlex
W2070204737
Cited by
202
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 15
FWCI
29.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Locations
  • Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (publishedVersion)
  • Strathprints: The University of Strathclyde institutional repository (University of Strathclyde) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Recommender Systems and Techniques
Keywords
information seeking, page structure, task type, web design

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review